—–

Here’s a link to Cherry Tree Media.

Politico:

Many months ago, HBO announced it was planning to make a movie based on the book, “Game Change” by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin. After reading John Nolte’s article, which indicated that the movie would be focused primarily around Governor Palin, and it wouldn’t be portraying her in a very positive light, I decided to study up on it. I purchased a copy of the book, read the TWO chapters based on Gov. Palin, and took down some notes.

As Nicole recently noted, HBO decided to release a trailer to that movie late last year. The actual movie doesn’t air until March 10, or as John Nolte wrote in his follow-up piece:

The one dynamic HBO probably didn’t count on was Palin’s decision not to run for the 2012 nomination. The film’s promotion and the cable news chatter that’s sure to follow seems timed to hit on, before, and around March 6, which is Super Tuesday.

The one line from the notes I took back in March that stood out as I was reviewing them for this piece, was:

Even though this book is supposed to be a story about 2008, it’s really all about 2012.

This movie was orchestrated from start to finish as a way to damage Gov. Palin during an election year by people who are not merely “artists & entertainers.” Just look at the people involved in the making of the movie.

First you have the director, Jay Roach who donated $2,300 to Barack Obama in 2008. Danny Strong, the person who wrote the screenplay, gave Obama $2,500 in 2008. Julianne Moore, the woman who does a poor impression of the governor, only gave $250 to Obama in ’08 but shelled out $2,500 to the DNC in 2010. And then there’s the film’s producer, Tom Hanks, who has one of the most nauseating donation lists I have ever seen, including giving a staggering sum of $345,000 to Obama. It’s safe to say that these people only donate large sums of money to causes they believe in. By looking at their donations, it’s easy to see what it is that they believe in.

Danny “Obama Victory Fund” Strong, based his HBO screenplay on a book that came under significant scrutiny after it was published, even by MSM types. The thing that stood out amongst most of its critics was the fact that Heilemann and Halperin didn’t source any of the accusations they made. They claim to have interviewed more than 300 people during their research, but not one of those people are named. Heilemann and Halperin do, however, name the people who were present during each instance during the ’08 campaign that they claim happened.

I found it interesting that within the Palin chapters of the book, Nicolle Wallace, her husband Mark Wallace, Steve Schmidt, and/or the mysterious “famous GOP strategist” are always present. It’s no secret that Nicolle Wallace has been trashing and undermining Gov. Palin since the 2008 race. Most recently, she was caught in a lie by a former senior adviser to the McCain campaign, Charlie Black. From National Review Online:

Over at the Washington Examiner, Byron York reports that Wallace is claiming, in a new Time interview, that McCain’s team considered bumping Palin from the veep slot. “There certainly were discussions — not for long because of the arc the campaign took — but certainly there were discussions about whether, if McCain were to win, it would be appropriate for her to be sworn in,” Wallace tells the magazine.

“Look, I was with McCain 90 percent of the time. If I wasn’t around, I knew what was happening. And nothing like this happened.” Wallace, he says, “is one of the few dissidents,” one of the “disaffected” staffers who continues to criticize Palin, and “she is inaccurate in doing so.”

[Charlie] Black says that’s nonsense. “Nicolle, like any author, is trying to sell books. This comment to Time, like her book [It’s Classified], is a piece of fiction. There were never any such discussions. At no high level of the campaign was there ever such talk. She’s probably doing this to sell her book.

Steve Schmidt also has a long history of trashing Governor Palin. In a 2010 post, Dan Riehl pegged the source of Schmidt’s animosity (emphasis):

The only modest bit of news in all this is that the pathetic Steve Schmidt continues to lack the class and intelligence required to simply shut up. Look at the basic facts even Schmidt is forced to confess. He would make it seem as though Palin was the absolutely worst thing about the McCain campaign, then he turns around and admits that, without her, things would have been much worse. That makes no sense.

On top of that, the fools running the campaign, including Schmidt, continued to consider Sen. Joe Lieberman for VP up until the very last minute, absolutely without realizing what a disaster that would have been. It took reactions outside the campaign to finally give them a clue how foolish they were in formulating and managing the campaign. Now suddenly, Schmidt is the all wise and wonderful know it all with the reputation, intellect and credibility to dump on Palin yet once, again? That makes no sense, either.

In continuing to not take responsibility for what a colossal failure he, as much, if not more than anyone else, was – all Schmidt has managed to accomplish with all his blathering is to put every potential national Republican candidate on notice that hiring Schmidt for perhaps anything other than coffee and sandwich fetching would be an unmitigated disaster dooming them and their campaign to eternal hell across the Republican base.

It’s clear that McCain’s campaign failed on many levels. But former staffers who were responsible for that failure used the leftist media to shift blame from themselves on to Gov. Palin, and that is reprehensible. Both the left and these former staffers had a motive to run this trash against the governor. They simply made up anything they thought sounded really bad then leaked it to an eager, Obama-rooting media which was more than happy to take their word for it. So, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the Wallaces and Schmidt are consistently present during Heilemann and Halperin’s tales. But what does that say about Heilemann and Halperin as journalists?

Can you really be a “respected journalist” if you never cite your sources? Sources are used so that readers can judge for themselves the credibility of each claim. Without them, “journalists” are doing nothing but repeating rumors, which usually earns one the title, “Gossip Columnist.” What about bloggers? Personally, I try not to write on important topics without listing my sources and posting links to back up claims. It’s one reason that I’ve never written a piece about all of the rumors regarding Mark Halperin sexually harassing and making inappropriate comments to female professional acquaintances. After all, they’re just rumors, right? (note: I have actually heard these rumors before, I didn’t just make them up for effect)

For years now, I’ve held to the notion that Gov. Palin’s foes will do whatever it takes to destroy perceptions of her in the eyes of Americans. From ex-staffers with an axe to grind, to smear merchants like Heilemann and Halperin, to the left-wing activists who “produce” all things Hollywood, this book and the movie that followed shows how folks with an agenda can work in concert to achieve their ends.

While each player may have a different overall agenda, the goal is the same. In the United States, 28.2 million households subscribe to HBO. That’s a lot of people who, by and large, are not familiar with the antics of the Wallaces, Schmidt, the rumors about Halperin, or how devoted Hanks is to pushing liberalism with campaign contributions and through the use popular culture. A fact not unnoticed by those responsible for this production.

Yet, not surprisingly, these three gals conveniently chuck feminism aside in regards to three others gals (Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin and Margaret Thatcher, respectively) whose political views differ from their own. Somehow, I must’ve missed the asterisk providing an exception to the feminist cause:  ‘Thou must support thy sisters – unless, of course, said sisters disagree with you politically.”

Barkin v. Bachmann: Barkin’s Twitter feed (which rivals that of Alec Baldwin’s in its unrestrained slamming of the right) repeatedly attacks conservative female figures. During the December 15th GOP debate, her vicious tweets revealed this actress is a feminist in name only. Blasting even Fox News’ gorgeous Megyn Kelly, a superstar network anchor and successful working mom (“This Megyn Kelley has more Botox in her f*ckin face than a 57 year old actress, Just sayin.”), Barkin saved her best sneer for Bachmann: “Don’t u just love when Bachmann says “When I am president…”? That’s like me saying… “When I am performing my next heart transplant….”  Odd, one would think Ms. Barkin, political-views aside, would have more respect for a woman who:  is a sitting member of Congress and presidential candidate, successfully raised 5 children and fostered a whopping 23 children. If Bachmann isn’t a poster girl for strong female women, I don’t know who is.

Moore v. Palin: Only a few days later, four-time Oscar nominee Moore, while interviewed about her upcoming hatchet job on Sarah Palin (the HBO mini-series “Game Change”), was asked if she’d developed a new-found respect for Palin after researching the former governor. The actress curtly answered, “No.” Again, how odd for a feminist to find absolutely nothing to admire in Palin. Politics aside, this is a working mother with five children who became governor of Alaska, a vice-presidential candidate and a superstar in the political world. Yet Moore found not one thing that impressed her about Palin? Though Moore does not tweet often, she did, curiously enough, find time to retweet Barkin’s sneer about Bachmann. One can almost hear the high-school-style giggling between these two so-called feminists.

Streep v. Thatcher:  Perhaps most shocking of all is the lack of respect by Streep towards Margaret Thatcher. Surely, one would assume that, at the very least, every feminist would have some kind words to say about the grocer’s daughter who rose to become one of the world’s sole female leaders and the UK’s first female prime minister? Think again. In press interviews for her Thatcher biopic, “The Iron Lady,” Streep bestowed no praise on her protagonist. On the contrary, she remarked the film was about a life in “decay” and touched upon the “cruelty that was there and how she [Thatcher] came to pay a price for it,” giving no examples, of course, of said “cruelty.”

Unbelievable.

These Hollywood mean girls either need to step out of their snickering clique long enough to give credit where credit is due or turn in their feminist card.

What do you all think?  Any other examples of so-called feminists attacking strong women of the right?

——

Other than focusing the narrative on former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the only other news here is how bad Julianne Moore’s accent is and that the tele-film will broadcast this coming March.

As far as the film itself, I don’t have much to add other than what I wrote last March when the project was first announced:

We’ll see how closely the film sticks to the book, but Governor Palin disputed how “Game Change” portrayed her and being as that it was one of the very few books I had time to read last year, it was easy to see why. Written by Mark Halperin of Time Magazine and MSNBC, and John Heilemann of the New Yorker, the lack of sourcing, the use of so many “anecdotes” based on tales told by ”deep background” types, allowed the authors to craft their reporting in a way that was obviously meant to reaffirm the mainstream media’s biased narrative of the 2008 campaign — especially when it came to destroying Palin and enshrining President Obama. I don’t think Palin’s a perfect person by any stretch of the imagination but I don’t think Barack Obama is perfect either, but after reading “Game Change” — other than an out-sized opinion of himself — you most certainly come to the conclusion that the calm, cool, smart, thoughtful, steady, ready-for-history Barack walks on water.

“Game Change” savages Palin with innuendo, gossip, and unnamed sources in order to portray her as some sort of supreme head case and diva who you would never believe was capable of amassing a resume that made her much more prepared to be president than the floundering failure ruining our economy right now. And I’m not the only one saying so. No less than the New York Times, the Atlantic and The Poynter Institute expressed concerns over the book’s gossipy lack of sourcing.

The one dynamic HBO probably didn’t count on was Palin’s decision not to run for the 2012 nomination. The film’s promotion and the cable news chatter that’s sure to follow seems timed to hit on, before, and around March 6, which is Super Tuesday. 

Was that part of HBO’s plan?

If it was, oh well.

Palin scored a reality show hit earlier this year with “Sarah Palin’s Alaska.” The usual suspects slammed the show, but the ratings were strong and viewers got to see a part of the country they likely never saw before. Palin put her ideological views aside, but the message was received all the same. This is a can-do woman who can back up her image as a frontier woman who can handle a crisis.

Now, Palin is considering a second season of “Alaska,” according to a new interview with show producer and reality show titan ark Burnett.

Burnett, who produced the first season of the former gov’s reality show, spoke to New York Post’s Page Six and said he’s is in talks with TLC to bring the show “back for a second season next fall.” Palin’s show pulled in the biggest premiere numbers ever for the network when it debuted last year.

The producer told Page Six that season two would shoot this summer and air after the 2012 election. Said Burnett, “By the time we edit it, the election will be over…But I am sure the election would be mentioned [in the show].” He added, “It makes perfect sense, because that is what’s going on. But it would be again Sarah in Alaska, living with Todd and the family and having adventures juxtaposed with doing her Fox News bits and discussing whatever is going on.”

The show, set to begin at The Kennedy Center Dec. 17, captures the larger-than-life late governor of Texas, Ann Richards.

Taylor is a dead ringer for Richards post-makeup even though most “Men” viewers don’t immediately think of Taylor as a political pundit. The gig coaxed one reporter to ask the actress what she thought of two other high-profile female politicians on the right, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann:

Leaning forward in her chair, Taylor replied, “I think she would laugh her ass off.” With her hands moving animatedly, she said, “I see Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin and think it is the end of the world if they can actually be taken seriously as presidential candidates. But Ann would just think it was funny. I think she would be pretty sure they wouldn’t get elected so they would just be good amusement value.

Taylor didn’t comment on the inexperienced politician currently fumbling his way through his third year in office.

WERNER HERZOG TRASHES ‘LAWRENCE OF ARABIA’

Whuh?

German director Werner Herzog (Aguirre, the Wrath of God; Nosferatu; Cave of Forgotten Dreams) has disparaged Lawrence of Arabia as “not really that good anymore.” Herzog criticized the screenplay by Robert Bolt for depicting the Arab world as “very stupid.” He added: “Lawrence of Arabia doesn’t portray the Arab world in a good way.” … Herzog said that for a forthcoming film he himself is educating himself about the Arab world — “about the region, about Islam, about [the] Bedouin … about the dignity of the Arabian world. This is something which you cannot learn from Lawrence of Arabia. It does not show what is true of today.”

Good grief, the protagonist in “Lawrence of Arabia,” who just so happens to be Lawrence of Arabia, practically becomes an Arab in the film and demands the British treat Arabs as equals. Furthermore, Omar Sharif’s Arab character is portrayed as educated and sophisticated, and over and over again we’re shown the bravery and honor of the various Arab tribes.

Is it David Lean’s fault history recorded the truth about all the tribal squabbles and feuds that doom the third act?

Well, let’s see if Herzog has the sand to “show what is true today”– the good, the terrorism, and the Sharia.

Don’t get me wrong, I very much admire Herzog. But this is just dumb.

BARBARA WALTERS ANNOUNCES 2011 MOST FASCINATING PERSON. IT’S…

I simply can’t imagine going through life caring about what someone as dumb and bubbled as Barbara Walters thinks.

WALT DISNEY, THE MAVERICK: A GUEST ESSAY BY JON FAVREAU

This, to me, is my favorite chapter of Walt’s life. The truly inspiring one.  The anointed king and namesake of Walt Disney Studios quietly slipped out the back door. He cashed in and took a handful of talented artists and, with Roy’s blessing, started over. He dreamed of a place. A place where families could come together and experience something unique yet familiar. A place to share an experience that offered comfort in a changing and scary world that seemed dead set on thumbing its nose at tradition and shredding families apart. A place where cutting edge technology and animatronics could create an immersive virtual reality of an idealized past and future, relying on each family to provide the present.

‘CHIPWRECKED’ REVIEW: BEWARE SARAH PALIN JOKES

In what can only be a bid to appeal to adults and to make amends for the idiocy of the entire outing, Chipwrecked is also packed with slightly out-of-date references – jokes about Sarah Palin, Captain Corelli’s Mandolin, the double rainbow guy, The Most Interesting Man in the World, and many more populate the film. These jokes are not funny. Yet, these attempts at adult-friendly chuckles are not alone, as Chipwrecked is clearly designed mainly to appeal to children. Oftentimes, when a studio screens a kid-aimed film for critics, they set the screening at a family-friendly time and allow the press to bring their children. It’s a nice touch by the bigwigs, but it allows grumbly old critics some key insights – mainly, are kids laughing at this? Kids laughed at Chipwrecked, but they didn’t seem taken in by it, delighted by the film, or even especially consumed by it.

‘RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK’ OPENING SCENE FANTASTICALLY RECREATED IN STOP MOTION

This is awesome.

BRUCE CAMPBELL CHATS WITH FANS LIVE DURING TONIGHT’S SEASON FINALE OF ‘BURN NOTICE’

How cool is this?

—–

—–

LAST NIGHT’S SCREENING

For some reason — probably the $3 cost of the DVD — I thought that after 23 years “Bright Lights, Big City” (1988) might play better, if only for nostalgic eighties purposes. Unfortunately, the movie remains so bad I can hardly believe the same director, the late James Bridges, directed “The China Syndrome.”

The story is dull, the performances — especially Michael J. Fox and Kiefer Sutherland — are one-note, and the production design and cinematography are even worse.  The sets look like, well, sets and the “crowd scenes” feel so staged you can practically see production assistants moving people in and out of shots.

The biggest problem, though, is the miscasting of Fox. While he’s a very talented comic actor, self-loathing is so far off his acting radar that you never believe for a moment his character is spiraling into some self-destructive black hole of debauchery.

The film’s biggest failure is that you never get any sense that the time and place of go-go Manhattan during the eighties has been captured. You’d have to work pretty hard to get that wrong.

—–

—–

SCOTTDS’ EPIC LINKTACULAR

DANIEL DAY-LEWIS IN COSTUME AS LINCOLN

TOM SIZEMORE WRITING MEMOIR ABOUT HIS STRUGGLES WITH DRUGS

MOST LAUGHABLE ATTEMPT TO EXPLOIT A BLOCKBUSTER FILM

THE 25 CRAZIEST ROGER CORMAN MOVIE POSTERS

THE 10 FREAKIEST COMMERCIALS OF 2011

NEW PROMO BANNERS FOR ‘THE AVENGERS‘

‘THE AVENGERS’ GETS A PREQUEL (COMIC)

LEONARD MALTIN’S TOP 5 CHRISTMAS MOVIES THAT AREN’T ABOUT CHRISTMAS

NICOLAS CAGE AND JANUARY JONES’S ‘SEEKING JUSTICE’ TO FINALLY (AND MERCIFULLY) GET RELEASED

‘THE CRITIC’ AND 24 OTHER UNDERRATED ANIMATED SHOWS

ALL KINDS OF ‘AMAZING SPIDER-MAN’ IMAGES

74 FILMS YOU CAN WATCH ON YOUTUBE RIGHT NOW

FIRST POSTER ARRIVES FOR SACHA BARON COHEN’S ‘THE DICTATOR’

A LOOK AT THE CAREER OF LANCE HENRIKSEN

PARAMOUNT PICTURES REACH THEIR 100TH ANNIVERSARY AND GET A NEW LOGO

10 SATIRICAL NOVELS ABOUT THE FUTURE

CLASSIC INSULTS FROM CLASSIC ACTORS

10 DOCUMENTARIES TAILOR-MADE FOR NERDS

‘CSI’ DELIVERS ITS LARGEST AUDIENCE SINCE PREMIERE

‘REBEL WITHOUT’ A CAUSE VS. ‘HUD‘

CHARLIE KAUFMAN TALKS SCREENWRITING: ‘IT ISN’T EASY BUT IT’S ESSENTIAL.’

TOP 10 STANLEY KUBRICK STARES

HBO TEASES NEW COMEDIES WITH ‘GIRLS’ & ‘VEEP’ TRAILERS

DEADLY DOMESTICITY: A LOOK AT THE GENRE OF ‘HOME NOIR’

—–

—–

CLASSIC PICK FOR FRIDAY, DECEMBER 16

TCM:

10:00 PM  EST: Christmas In Connecticut (1945) –  A homemaking specialist who can’t boil water is forced to provide a family holiday for a war hero. Dir: Peter Godfrey Cast:  Barbara Stanwyck, Dennis Morgan, Sydney Greenstreet. BW-102 mins, TV-G, CC,

The whole story is made possible because the protagonists want to display their patriotism and do something good for a war hero.

A reminder that Hollywood didn’t always suck.

—–

—–

Please send comments, suggestions and tips to jnolte@breitbart.com or Twitter @NolteNC.

C.K., currently promoting his self-financed comedy special, told Nightline that he wished MorganGate had gone down much differently than it did.

But C.K. also feels that Morgan’s critics did themselves a disservice by being quick to attack Morgan instead of opening up a dialogue about the subject.

“The opportunity that was lost was for the gay community to ask Tracy, ‘Why did you say that? What was your dad like? What is being a man like to you?’ It could have been the starting point of a conversation that might have actually made a difference in the way people feel about homophobia,” C.K. said.

“But to say, you can’t say that, and that’s hate speech, and to go on a ’sorry’ tour, that’s a waste of time to me. I think it was a wasted opportunity.”

Morgan’s fellow comedians were mostly silent regarding the backlash to his anti-gay routine. Not only is C.K. defending Morgan – to a degree – he’s offering a credible solution at the same time.

Now, if only we had a teachable moment surrounding the vile things C.K. said about Sarah Palin.

Instead, Todd Palin will be the main attraction.

The Hollywood Reporter has learned that Palin and Burnett are pitching another reality series, this one more focused on Palin’s husband Todd and his career as a championship snowmobile racer. But for now, TLC owner Discovery Communications has passed, say sources. And A&E Networks, which entered into a bidding war with Discovery for Sarah Palin’s Alaska, also is not interested.

The show can’t find a network yet, a fact the publication blames in part on the high price tag associated with the show along with Palin’s declining cultural clout.

—–

Jones would like to elevate the discussion … now. I’m not sure what happened between now and Tuesday when he refused to apologize and defended the Tweet by stating it was his “job as an artist to up a mirror to society.”

Big Hollywood didn’t make a big deal out of the original tweet. We were simply one of the first outlets to report it as yet another example of the glaring double standard at work among our entertainment class.

Wake me when some brave artist “holds a mirror up to society” with jokes about killing Michelle Obama.